KISTO ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Cr. Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23rd April, 2007 and 25th April, 2007 respectively whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as fine. In default of making payment of fine amount, the convict shall have to suffer three months simple imprisonment.

(2.) The facts which appear from the fardbayan of Bhukha Uroan recorded on 06.01.2004 at 9 hours at village Hdar Bhandar Toli within P.S. Ghaghra, District-Gumla in brief is that on 05.01.2004 the deceased with his family members after having dinner had gone to sleep in their respective rooms. At about 9 p.m. the appellant who happens to be son-in-law of the deceased knocked on the door. When it was not opened by the deceased, he broke open the door, entered into the room and gave repeated blows by means of 'Tangi' to the deceased causing injury on his face and other part of the body. The occurrence was witnessed by Sarita Kumari (P.W.9) and Anita (P.W.11) daughters of the deceased. They wanted to restrain the accused but they were threatened. Thereafter Sarita rushed to the house of her cousin Bhukha Uraon (informant) and reported the incident. Bhukha Uraon along with Sarita rushed to the house of deceased and saw him injured. By that time some of the villagers had also reached. The axe which was used for commission of the offence was also lying at the spot. On the next morning at about 9 a.m. fardbayan of Bhukha Uraon was recorded and a case being Gumla Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 03/04 dated 06.01.2004 was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against accused Kisto Oraon son of Shiv Nandan Bhagat. The police after due investigation submitted charge-sheet against the accused and accordingly cognizance under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was taken. Since the occurrence under Section 302 I.P.C. is exclusively triable by court of sessions, case of the accused Kisto Oraon was committed to the court of sessions. Charge was framed under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to which appellant denied and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution has examined altogether 12 witnesses in order to substantiate the charge and further proved the documents. P.W.1 (Khadi Uraon), P.W. 2 (Sukra Uraon) and P.W. 10 (Jokhna Uraon) are the hearsay witnesses and they have supported the prosecution case. Mahendra Mahto (P.W.3) and Tetru Uraon (P.W. 4) are the witnesses to the seizure of an axe allegedly used for commission of the offence. They have proved their signatures appearing on the seizure list and supported the recovery of axe from the place of occurrence. Ram Bharos Baraik (P.W.5) and Chetan Uraon (P.W.6) are the witnesses to the inquest and they have proved their signatures appearing on the inquest report. Bhukha Uraon (P.W. 7) is the informant and he has supported the prosecution case. He has stated on the date of his examination that the occurrence took place about nine months ago. When he was sleeping in his house, his cousin sister Sarita Kumari made him awake and informed that Kisto Oraon (appellant) has killed Kanjiya Bhagat (father of Sarita). The informant accompanying Sarita rushed to the house of deceased and saw the dead body. The axe which was allegedly used for commission of the offence was lying on the spot. The reason behind the occurrence as assigned by the informant and other witnesses is that the deceased was not having male child. His daughter Anita was married with Kisto Oraon (appellant) but Anita was not blessed with any child. The appellant was residing with the deceased in his house as 'Ghar Jamai' and he wanted to get the property of the deceased transferred in his name and further wanted to marry his sister-in-law Sarita. On the basis of fardbayan of Bhukha Oraon a case being Gumla Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 03/04 dated 06.01.2004 was registered. The informant has supported the prosecution case and the defence was not able to get any material contradiction in his cross-examination. The statement of P.W. 7 remained intact. Sarita Kumari P.W. 9 and Anita Devi P.W. 11 are the two eyewitnesses and being the daughters of the deceased both the witnesses were present in the house at the time of occurrence. Anita Devi (P.W.11) happens to be wife of the appellant but she has fully supported the prosecution case and deposed that it was appellant Kisto Oraon, who killed Kanjiya Bhagat by means of 'Tangi'. Sarita Kumari (P.W. 9) has deposed that family members had gone to sleep after having their meal. On 05.01.2004 at about 9 p.m. the appellant knocked the door of the deceased. When he did not receive any response from inside, he broke open the door and gave repeated blow by means of 'Tangi' to the deceased causing injury on his face and other part of the body. The motive behind the occurrence find support from the statement of P.W. 9. Detailed cross-examination was done to this witness but she stood to the test of her cross-examination and the defence was not able to elicit any material point to disbelieve her version about the occurrence. Dr. Hemant Kumar (P.W.8) had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Kanjiya Bhagat on 06.01.2004 at about 1 p.m. The Doctor had found as many as six incised wound on the person of the deceased and according to Doctor the injury were caused by sharp cutting weapon. The Doctor has opined injury No. 2, 4 & 5 as simple in nature whereas injury No. 1, 3 & 6 were grievous. He has further deposed that injury No. 1 & 3 were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Binod Kumar (P.W. 12) is the Police Officer and he has proved fardbayan which was recorded by J.S.I. Ravindra Prasad Singh and fardbayan has been marked Ext. 4. He has further proved formal F.I.R. as Ext. 5, Seizure list as Ext. 6 and Inquest report as Ext. 7.